DOCSLIB.ORG

Maria Paleologina and the Il-Khanate of Persia. a Byzantine Princess in an Empire Between Islam and Christendom

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Maria Paleologina and the Il-Khanate of Persia. a Byzantine Princess in an Empire Between Islam and Christendom MARIA PALEOLOGINA AND THE IL-KHANATE OF PERSIA. A BYZANTINE PRINCESS IN AN EMPIRE BETWEEN ISLAM AND CHRISTENDOM MARÍA ISABEL CABRERA RAMOS UNIVERSIDAD DE GRANADA SpaIN Date of receipt: 26th of January, 2016 Final date of acceptance: 12th of July, 2016 ABSTRACT In the 13th century Persia, dominated by the Mongols, a Byzantine princess, Maria Paleologina, stood out greatly in the court of Abaqa Khan, her husband. The Il-Khanate of Persia was then an empire precariously balanced between Islam, dominant in its territories and Christianity that was prevailing in its court and in the diplomatic relations. The role of Maria, a fervent Christian, was decisive in her husband’s policy and in that of any of his successors. Her figure deserves a detailed study and that is what we propose in this paper. KEYWORDS Maria Paleologina, Il-khanate of Persia, Abaqa, Michel VIII, Mongols. CapitaLIA VERBA Maria Paleologa, Ilkhanatus Persiae, Abaqa, Michael VIII, Mongoles. IMAGO TEMPORIS. MEDIUM AEVUM, XI (2017): 217-231 / ISSN 1888-3931 / DOI 10.21001/itma.2017.11.08 217 218 MARÍA ISABEL CABRERA RAMOS 1. Introduction The great expansion of Genghis Khan’s hordes to the west swept away the Islamic states and encouraged for a while the hopes of the Christian states of the East. The latter tried to ally themselves with the powerful Mongols and in this attempt they played the religion card.1 Although most of the Mongols who entered Persia, Iraq and Syria were shamanists, Nestorian Christianity exerted a strong influence among elites, especially in the court. That was why during some crucial decades for the history of the East, the Il-Khanate of Persia fluctuated between the consolidation of Christian influence and the approach to Islam, that despite the devastation brought by the Mongols in Persia,2 Iraq and Syria remained the dominant factor within the Il-khanate. 2. The Latins, Byzantium and the alliance with the Mongols Constantinople, Acropolis of the Universe, capital of the Roman Empire, that had been, by God’s will, under the power of the Latins, finds itself again under the power of the Romans, and this was granted through us.3 The year was 1261 and the sovereign so expressed, arrogant and proud was the future Michael VIII Palaeologus, who had just accomplished the dream long shared by the Greeks: reconquer Constantinople and throw the Latins out of it. But this arrogant ruler had ahead of him an even more titanic task than the one done so far: to restore and maintain the Byzantine Empire against its many enemies. He had much to fear; therefore he used to resort to divination worried about what fate might bring to his dynasty and his Empire.4 An Empire which at that time was nothing more than un corps grêle, disloqué, misérable, sur lequel se posait une tête énorme, Constantinople.5 From each one of the cardinal points, there were predators lurking, and the Empire in the centre like a wounded animal; East in Asia the Turks and the Mongols, the Serbs and the Bulgarians North in the Balkans; the Venetians in the Archipelago, the Genoese in the Black Sea and the Latins West.6 At this 1. Foltz, Richard. Religions of the Silk Road. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. 2. Morgan, David. The Mongols. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2007. 3. Gregoras, Nicephorus (Γρηγοράς, Νικηφόρος). Ρωμαïκή Ιστορία. Α’ Περίοδος: 1204-1341, ed. and trans. Dimitrios Moschos (Διμιτριοσ Μόσχος). Athens: Νέα Σύνορα, 1997: 103-109. 4. Ducas. Historia Turco-Bizantina, ed. Francisco Javier Ortolá, Fernando Alconchel. Madrid: Antonio Machado Libros, 2006: 66, 2643-264; La Gran Conquista de Ultramar, ed. Louis Cooper. Madison: Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies, 1989: 255. 5. "a weak, emaciated and miserable body with a huge head: Constantinople". Diehl, Charles. Etudes byzantins. Paris: A. Picard et fils, 1905: 220 (“L’Empire byzantin sous les Paléologues”). 6. Marcos Hierro, Ernest. La Croada Catalana. L’exèrcit de Jaume I a Terra Santa. Barcelona: L’esfera dels Ilibres, 2007; Marcos Hierro, Ernest. “La croada a Terra Santa de 1269 i la política internacional de Jaume I”, Jaume I. Commemoració del VIII centenari del naixement de Jaume I, Ferrer i Mallol, Maria Teresa, ed. Barcelona: Institut d’Etudis Catalans, 2011: I, 509-522. IMAGO TEMPORIS. MEDIUM AEVUM, XI (2017): 217-231 / ISSN 1888-3931 / DOI 10.21001/itma.2017.11.08 MARIA PALEOLOGINA AND THE IL-KHANATE OF PERsiA. 219 juncture was forged a masterful diplomat, Michael: stubborn, crafty, unscrupulous and so skilful that was able to carry out a complicated foreign policy that managed to neutralize the enemies of the Empire and to expand its borders.7 Meanwhile the Byzantine Emperor was trying to regain his capital and his empire and was facing his Western enemies; the Mongols had settled in Persia and Iraq and were trying to take over Syria.8 This led to a new division of strategy and powers in the East, where Mamelukes, Turks and Mongols were fighting to gain control of the region. The Byzantine ruler decided to use the diplomatic roads opened by the new situation and sent two embassies, one to the Mamluk sultan and another one to Hulagu, prince of the Tartars.9 By the first embassy was not established any alliance, the second will have more positive and lasting outcomes as the Mongols and the Byzantines forged a lasting, but of a complex character, political and military alliance between two very different political and cultural worlds.10 The emperor sent numerous gifts and sealed alliances signed by two imperial marriages, one with the Khan of the Golden Horde and the other with the first Khan of the Il-Khanate: Hulagu.11 Two illegitimate daughters of Michael VIII, Maria and Euphrosyne,12 gotten with one of his mistresses whose name is unknown, although we know that she lived in Constantinople between 1224-1307 and belonged to the family of Diplovatatzoi or Diplobatatzés.13 7. Beihammer, Alexander; Parani, Maria; Schabel, Chris. Diplomatics in the Eastern Mediterranean 1000- 1500. Aspects of Cross-Cultural Communication. Leiden-Boston: Brill, 2008; La Crónica de Morea, ed. José M. Egea. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1996: 295; Bar Hebraeus. “Chronicles”. Syri.ac. An annotated Bibliography of Syriac resources online. 12 September 2015 <http://syri.ac/ bhchronicles#CSpage>, see especially chapter 10; Gregoras, Nicephorus (Γρηγοράς, Νικηφόρος). Ρωμαïκή Ιστορία…: 116-117; Pachymère. “Histoire des Empereurs Michel et Andronique”. L’antiquité grecque et latine Du moyen âge. 12 June 2016 <http://remacle.org/bloodwolf/histoireconstantinople/table1.htm>, see book IV: chapter II; chapter XXXII, part 1; chapter XXXV, part 2; chapter IV and chapter XXIX (from the version: Pachymère. “Histoire des Empereurs Michel et Andronique”. Histoire de Constantinople depuis le règne de l’Ancien Justin, jusqu’à la fin de l’Empire. Traduite sur les originaux grecs par Mr Cousin, VI. Paris: Chez Damien Foucault, 1674); Runciman, Steven. Vísperas Sicilianas. Una historia del mundo mediterráneo a finales del siglo XIII, trad. Alicia Bleiberg. Madrid: Revista de Occidente, 1979: 139-140. 8. Jackson, Peter. The Mongols and the West: 1221-1410. London: Routledge, 2005. 9. Pachymère. “Histoire des Empereurs…”: book IV, chapter III, part 1. 10. Mansouri, Mohamed Tahar. “Byzantins, Mamluks et Mongols aux alentours de 1265”, Byzantiaka XII (1992): 317-324; Mongols, Turks and others. Euroasian nomads and the Sedentary World, ed. Reuven Amitai, Michal Biran. Leiden-Boston: Brill, 2005. 11. Richard, Jean. “Älgigidäi à Gazan: la continuité d’une politique franque chez les Mongols d’Iran”, L’Iran face à la domination mongole, Denise Aigle, ed. Teheran: Institut français de recherche en Iran, 1997: 57-69; Gregoras, Nicephorus (Γρηγοράς, Νικηφόρος). Ρωμαïκή Ιστορία…: 62; Amitai-Preiss, Reuven. “Hulagu Khan”, Encyclopædia Iranica, Ehsan Yarshater, Ahmad Ashraf, eds. New York: Bibliotheca Persica Press, 2001: X, 554-557. Online version available in: Amitai-Preiss, Reuven. “Ḡāzān Khan, Maḥmūd (1271-1304)”. Encyclopædia Iranica. 3 February 2012. 12 June 2016 <http://www.iranicaonline.org/ articles/gazan-khan-mahmud>. 12. Pachymère. “Histoire des Empereurs…”: book IV, chapter III, part 2. 13. Hunger, Herbert, ed. Prosopographisches Lexikon der Palaiologenzeit, 3 Faszikel: Δ...-‘Ησύχιος. Viena: Erstellt von E. Trapp, 1978: 50-51. IMAGO TEMPORIS. MEDIUM AEVUM, XI (2017): 217-231 / ISSN 1888-3931 / DOI 10.21001/itma.2017.11.08 220 MARÍA ISABEL CABRERA RAMOS Maria Paleologina (1258/9-1282) was the first to arrive in 1265 to mongol lands being the future wife of Hulagu, as part of an ambitious plan of political and military cooperation between the Byzantines and the Mongols. For both Hulagu and Michael VIII being allies suited them at the time.14 The Byzantine emperor in this way overcame his ineffectiveness to protect the eastern borders of the Empire, using the Mongols to hold the Turkish threat.15 Michael wanted to protect his empire at all of its costs, and so he acted oblivious to religious or ethnic prejudices, as did in his time John Vatatzes (emperor of Nicaea) when he allied himself with the Seljuks of Iconium to guard against the threatening Mongolian expedition that was then progressing unstoppable in Russia, Hungary and Poland.16 In addition to strategic and defensive considerations, Michael had to think about the profitability of the location of the Hulagu’s states that were cutting the land route between the Mamluks and the Kiptchaks (Cumans), this route was not only of economic importance to the Mamluks and Italian merchants, but also of political and military one. It was among the Cumans that slaves were drawn, and once arrived in Egypt, were becoming Mamluks forming the military and political elite of the country.17 Thus, the control of the land route by the Byzantine emperor together with his control of the Hellespont, the Bosporus and the Black Sea gave him a powerful tool of pressure on the Mamluks of Egypt.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Conquest of Arsuf by Baybars: Political and Military Aspects (MSR IX.1, 2005)
    REUVEN AMITAI THE HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM The Conquest of Arsu≠f by Baybars: Political and Military Aspects* A modern-day visitor to Arsu≠f1 cannot help but be struck by the neatly arranged piles of stones from siege machines found at the site. This ordering, of course, represents the labors of contemporary archeologists and their assistants to gather the numerous but scattered stones. Yet, in spite of the recent nature of this "installation," these heaps are clear, if mute, evidence of the great efforts of the Mamluks led by Sultan Baybars (1260–77) to conquer the fortified city from the Franks in 1265. This conquest, as well as its political background and its aftermath, will be the subjects of the present article, which can also be seen as a case-study of Mamluk siege warfare. The immediate backdrop to the Mamluk attack against Arsu≠f was the events of the preceding weeks. At the end of 1264, while Baybars was hunting in the Egyptian countryside, he received reports that the Mongols were heading in force for the Mamluk border fortress of al-B|rah along the Euphrates, today in south- eastern Turkey. The sultan quickly returned to Cairo, and ordered the immediate dispatch of advanced light forces, which were followed by a more organized, but still relatively small, force under the command of the senior amir (officer) Ughan Samm al-Mawt ("the Elixir of Death"), and then by a third corps, together with © Middle East Documentation Center. The University of Chicago. *I would like to thank Prof. Israel Roll of Tel Aviv University, who conducted the excavations at the site, and was most helpful when he showed us the site.
    [Show full text]
  • Muhammad Uljaytu's Conversion to Islam Key Terms
    Muhammad Uljaytu’s Conversion to Islam Seyyedeh Samira Behzadi1 After the Mongols’ invasion of Iran, no one could ever imagine that the grand children of Genghis Khan would pave the context for the growth and dissemination of Islam in later periods. Genghis Khan, himself, was a shaman and his grandsons, such as Hulagu Khan and Abaqa Khan, and Abaqa Khan’s children were Buddhists. However, they always dealt with the followers of other religions and sects with respect. The court of Hulagu Khan in Iran was always frequented by the scholars of other religions. Some of the children and grandchildren of Hulagu Khan abandoned their ancestral religion because of the necessities of their time and converted to Islam or Christianity. In this regard, reference can be made to Ghazan Khan and Muhammad Uljaytu who, because of the penetration of Muslim scholars in their courts, paid attention to Islam and Shi’ism. Ghazan Khan chose the Hanafite religion but did not formally acknowledge his conversion to Shi’ism for certain political reasons. Muhammad Uljaytu, his brother, persuaded the king to follow Shi’ism more openly for several reasons including the penetration of some Muslim scholars and Shi’iteministers and rulers, such as Allamah al-Hilli, his son Fakhr ul- Muhaqqiqin, and Amir TarmTaz, in his court and their arguments as to the superiority of Shi’ism over Sunnism. Uljaytu chose the Twelver branch of Shi’ism and, at the sometime, issued the order of reading sermons in Friday prayers in the name of the Shi’ite Imams (a) and minting coins in their names.
    [Show full text]
  • Politik Penguasaan Bangsa Mongol Terhadap Negeri- Negeri Muslim Pada Masa Dinasti Ilkhan (1260-1343)
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by E-Jurnal UIN (Universitas Islam Negeri) Alauddin Makassar Politik Penguasaan Bangsa Mongol Budi dan Nita (1260-1343) POLITIK PENGUASAAN BANGSA MONGOL TERHADAP NEGERI- NEGERI MUSLIM PADA MASA DINASTI ILKHAN (1260-1343) Budi Sujati dan Nita Yuli Astuti Pascasarjana UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung Email: [email protected] Abstract In the history of Islam, the destruction of the Abbasid dynasty as the center of Islamic civilization in its time that occurred on February 10, 1258 by Mongol attacks caused Islam to lose its identity.The destruction had a tremendous impact whose influence could still be felt up to now, because at that time all the evidence of Islamic relics was destroyed and burnt down without the slightest left.But that does not mean that with the destruction of Islam as a conquered religion is lost as swallowed by the earth. It is precisely with Islam that the Mongol conquerors who finally after assimilated for a long time were drawn to the end of some of the Mongol descendants themselves embraced Islam by establishing the Ilkhaniyah dynasty based in Tabriz Persia (present Iran).This is certainly the author interest in describing a unique event that the rulers themselves who ultimately follow the beliefs held by the community is different from the conquests of a nation against othernations.In this study using historical method (historical study) which is descriptive-analytical approach by using as a medium in analyzing. So that events that have happened can be known by involving various scientific methods by using social science and humanities as an approach..By using social science and humanities will be able to answer events that happened to the Mongols as rulers over the Muslim world make Islam as the official religion of his government to their grandchildren.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the Crusades. Episode 103 the Last Crusades. Hello Again
    History of the Crusades. Episode 103 The Last Crusades. Hello again. Last week, things didn't go so well for the Latin Christians in the Middle East, with an entire Crusader state, the Principality of Antioch, being effectively wiped off the map following an invasion by the Egyptian Mamluk Sultan Baibars. The Latin Christians of Europe had been viewing events in the Holy Land with concern for some time, and with the fall of Antioch, it was obvious that some urgent assistance was required. More specifically, what was needed of course, was another Crusade. As far back as August 1266 Pope Clement IV had begun to call for a new Crusade. England had been wracked by civil war, but that had come to an end in 1265, and with King Louis IX’s ambitious brother Charles of Anjou securing for himself the Sicilian crown in 1266, the attentions of the people in Europe could finally focus on problems in the Middle East. King Louis of France, now aged in his early fifties, jumped at the chance to redeem the failure of his ill-fated previous Crusade, and on the 25th of March 1267 once again made a public vow to take up the Cross. Also raising their hands to mount a Crusade were Lord Edward of England and King James I of Aragon. Lord Edward was the son of the aging King Henry III of England, and would later become King Edward I. Against his father's wishes. Lord Edward made his Crusading vow in 1268, and many of the noblemen of England, keen to put the trauma of the recent civil war behind them, followed his example.
    [Show full text]
  • DOI: 10.22378/2313-6197.2017-5-3 ISSN 2313-6197 (Online) ISSN 2308-152X (Print) ЗОЛОТООРДЫНСКОЕ ОБОЗРЕНИЕ 2017
    DOI: 10.22378/2313-6197.2017-5-3 ISSN 2313-6197 (Online) ISSN 2308-152X (Print) ЗОЛОТООРДЫНСКОЕ ОБОЗРЕНИЕ 2017. Том 5, № 3 ZOLOTOORDYNSKOE OBOZRENIE= G OLDEN H ORDE R EVIEW 2017. Vol. 5, no. 3 Научный журнал Academic Journal УЧРЕДИТЕЛЬ: FOUNDER: ГБУ «Институт истории State Institution им. Ш. Марджани Академии наук «Sh.Marjani Institute of History Республики Татарстан» of Tatarstan Academy of Sciences» Свидетельство о регистрации СМИ Certificate of registration in the mass media ПИ № ФС77–54682 от 9 июля 2013 г. ПИ № ФС77–54682 given by Roskomnadzor выдано Роскомнадзором on 9 July 2013 Журнал основан в апреле 2013 г. Journal was founded in April 2013 Выходит 4 раза в год Published 4 times a year РЕДАКЦИЯ: EDITORIAL OFFICE: 420014, г. Казань, Кремль, подъезд 5 (юрид.) 420014, Kazan, Kremlin, entrance 5 (juridical) 420111, г. Казань, ул. Батурина, 7 420111, Kazan, Baturin Str., 7 Тел./факс (843) 292 84 82 (приемная), Tel./Fax (843) 292 84 82 (reception), 292 00 19 292 00 19 Подписной индекс в каталоге Subscription index in the «Catalogue «Каталог Российской Прессы» – 31999 of the Russian Press» – 31999 ЖУРНАЛ ИНДЕКСИРУЕТСЯ В: THE JOURNAL IS INDEXED BY: Scopus Scopus Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory Российский индекс научного Russian Science Citation цитирования (РИНЦ), РГБ Index Database, RSL AcademicKeys, WorldCat AcademicKeys, WorldCat Научная электронная библиотека Scientific Electronic Open Access открытого доступа КиберЛенинка Library CyberLeninka Google Scholar, СОЦИОНЕТ Google Scholar, SOCIONET Журнал входит в Перечень российских рецензируемых научных журналов, в которых должны быть опубликованы основные научные результаты диссертаций на соискание ученых степеней доктора и кандидата наук (список научных журналов ВАК МОиН РФ) http://goldhorde.ru E-mail: [email protected] © ГБУ «Институт истории им.
    [Show full text]
  • Protagonist of Qubilai Khan's Unsuccessful
    BUQA CHĪNGSĀNG: PROTAGONIST OF QUBILAI KHAN’S UNSUCCESSFUL COUP ATTEMPT AGAINST THE HÜLEGÜID DYNASTY MUSTAFA UYAR* It is generally accepted that the dissolution of the Mongol Empire began in 1259, following the death of Möngke the Great Khan (1251–59)1. Fierce conflicts were to arise between the khan candidates for the empty throne of the Great Khanate. Qubilai (1260–94), the brother of Möngke in China, was declared Great Khan on 5 May 1260 in the emergency qurultai assembled in K’ai-p’ing, which is quite far from Qara-Qorum, the principal capital of Mongolia2. This event started the conflicts within the Mongolian Khanate. The first person to object to the election of the Great Khan was his younger brother Ariq Böke (1259–64), another son of Qubilai’s mother Sorqoqtani Beki. Being Möngke’s brother, just as Qubilai was, he saw himself as the real owner of the Great Khanate, since he was the ruler of Qara-Qorum, the main capital of the Mongol Khanate. Shortly after Qubilai was declared Khan, Ariq Böke was also declared Great Khan in June of the same year3. Now something unprecedented happened: there were two competing Great Khans present in the Mongol Empire, and both received support from different parts of the family of the empire. The four Mongol khanates, which should theo- retically have owed obedience to the Great Khan, began to act completely in their own interests: the Khan of the Golden Horde, Barka (1257–66) supported Böke. * Assoc. Prof., Ankara University, Faculty of Languages, History and Geography, Department of History, Ankara/TURKEY, [email protected] 1 For further information on the dissolution of the Mongol Empire, see D.
    [Show full text]
  • The Last Great Nomadic Challenges: from Chinggis Khan to Timur
    ChapterChapter 14 The Last Great Nomadic Challenges: From Chinggis Khan to Timur (A.D. 500 – A.D. 1450) The Steppe How would you characterize this region? Where is this? Steppe Culture . Loyalty to kin/clan . Courage culture . Horsemanship . Mobile (pastoralists & hunters) . Animists . Raiding between tribes . Traded with sedentary peoples for manufactured goods . Invented stirrups Mongols . Declared themselves to be descendents of Huns who founded the 1st steppe empire in late Classical era. Called “Tartars” especially by Westerners (“people from hell”), though a misnomer: Mongols conquered steppe tribe Tartars, but because so many Tartars rose to prominence in the Mongol Empire, the name became synonymous with Mongols. The Mongols . The Mongols were well known for their ability to ride horses well and wage war. Skilled in shooting short composite bows and arrows from horseback. Organized troops effectively and readily adopted new technologies, like gunpowder from China. At a meeting of Mongol leaders in 1206, a man named Temujin was Mongol Conquests elected Genghis Khan, which means strong ruler. He united Mongol tribes and conquered a vast empire that stretched from the Pacific Ocean to Eastern Europe. Genghiz Khan imposed strict military discipline and demanded absolute loyalty. His highly trained armies contained some of the most skilled horsemen in the world. In their conquest of China, the Mongol armies faced the problem of attacking walled cities. Mongol and Chinese armies used missile weapons against each other. Genghis Khan . Valued individual merit & loyalty . Fighting wasn’t honorable; winning was. So, used any means necessary to win (trickery, etc.) . Conscripted peasants: Mongols just didn’t understand peasants who seemed like grazing animals rather than real humans who ate meat.
    [Show full text]
  • Power, Politics, and Tradition in the Mongol Empire and the Ilkhanate of Iran
    OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 08/08/16, SPi POWER, POLITICS, AND TRADITION IN THE MONGOL EMPIRE AND THE ĪlkhānaTE OF IRAN OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 08/08/16, SPi OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 08/08/16, SPi Power, Politics, and Tradition in the Mongol Empire and the Īlkhānate of Iran MICHAEL HOPE 1 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 08/08/16, SPi 3 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6D P, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries © Michael Hope 2016 The moral rights of the author have been asserted First Edition published in 2016 Impression: 1 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Control Number: 2016932271 ISBN 978–0–19–876859–3 Printed in Great Britain by Clays Ltd, St Ives plc Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only.
    [Show full text]
  • Phd 15.04.27 Versie 3
    Promotor Prof. dr. Jan Dumolyn Vakgroep Geschiedenis Decaan Prof. dr. Marc Boone Rector Prof. dr. Anne De Paepe Nederlandse vertaling: Een Spiegel voor de Sultan. Staatsideologie in de Vroeg Osmaanse Kronieken, 1300-1453 Kaftinformatie: Miniature of Sultan Orhan Gazi in conversation with the scholar Molla Alâeddin. In: the Şakayıku’n-Nu’mâniyye, by Taşköprülüzâde. Source: Topkapı Palace Museum, H1263, folio 12b. Faculteit Letteren & Wijsbegeerte Hilmi Kaçar A Mirror for the Sultan State Ideology in the Early Ottoman Chronicles, 1300- 1453 Proefschrift voorgelegd tot het behalen van de graad van Doctor in de Geschiedenis 2015 Acknowledgements This PhD thesis is a dream come true for me. Ottoman history is not only the field of my research. It became a passion. I am indebted to Prof. Dr. Jan Dumolyn, my supervisor, who has given me the opportunity to take on this extremely interesting journey. And not only that. He has also given me moral support and methodological guidance throughout the whole process. The frequent meetings to discuss the thesis were at times somewhat like a wrestling match, but they have always been inspiring and stimulating. I also want to thank Prof. Dr. Suraiya Faroqhi and Prof. Dr. Jo Vansteenbergen, for their expert suggestions. My colleagues of the History Department have also been supportive by letting me share my ideas in development during research meetings at the department, lunches and visits to the pub. I would also like to sincerely thank the scholars who shared their ideas and expertise with me: Dimitris Kastritsis, Feridun Emecen, David Wrisley, Güneş Işıksel, Deborah Boucayannis, Kadir Dede, Kristof d’Hulster, Xavier Baecke and many others.
    [Show full text]
  • The Coins of the Later Ilkhanids
    THE COINS OF THE LATER ILKHANIDS : A TYPOLOGICAL ANALYSIS 1 BY SHEILA S. BLAIR Ghazan Khan was undoubtedly the most brilliant of the Ilkhanid rulers of Persia: not only a commander and statesman, he was also a linguist, architect and bibliophile. One of his most lasting contribu- tions was the reorganization of Iran's financial system. Upon his accession to the throne, the economy was in total chaos: his prede- cessor Gaykhatf's stop-gap issue of paper money to fill an empty treasury had been a fiasco 2), and the civil wars among Gaykhatu, Baydu, and Ghazan had done nothing to restore trade or confidence in the economy. Under the direction of his vizier Rashid al-Din, Ghazan delivered an edict ordering the standardization of the coinage in weight, purity, and type 3). Ghazan's standard double-dirham became the basis of Iran's monetary system for the next century. At varying intervals, however, the standard type was changed: a new shape cartouche was introduced, with slight variations in legend. These new types were sometimes issued at a modified weight standard. This paper will analyze the successive standard issues of Ghazan and his two successors, Uljaytu and Abu Said, in order to show when and why these new types were introduced. Following a des- cription of the successive types 4), the changes will be explained through 296 an investigation of the metrology and a correlation of these changes in type with economic and political history. Another article will pursue the problem of mint organization and regionalization within this standard imperial system 5).
    [Show full text]
  • About the Mongol Invasions
    CK_4_TH_HG_P087_242.QXD 10/6/05 9:02 AM Page 162 V. China: Dynasties and Conquerors navigators could use it to be sure they were traveling in the right direction. The compass did not reach Europe until the 1200s. It was one of the navigational devices that enabled Europeans to embark on their voyages of exploration in search of an all-water route to Asia. Paper money came into use in China during the Song dynasty. The Chinese, Teaching Idea as well as other peoples, had been using metal coins for centuries, but the Chinese Ask students to write an expository were the first to use paper currency. Two other inventions converged to make the piece about why they think the Chinese use of paper currency possible. First, the Chinese had invented the process of invented paper money instead of con- making paper in 105 CE, and then, during the Tang dynasty in the 700s CE, they tinuing solely to use coins. Historians had learned how to print from large blocks of type—the words for a page were believe the Chinese switched to paper carved into a single block of wood the size of the page, then inked, and paper money because there was not enough applied. In the 1040s, the Chinese had invented the use of movable type for print- copper, bronze, and iron to make coins ing. The characters for individual words were carved into small pieces of wood and for the entire population. Also, paper assembled to make a page, then inked, and paper applied. Europeans would not money was easier to carry around and employ movable type until the time of Gutenberg, about 1450.
    [Show full text]
  • Il-Khanate Empire
    1 Il-Khanate Empire 1250s, after the new Great Khan, Möngke (r.1251–1259), sent his brother Hülegü to MICHAL BIRAN expand Mongol territories into western Asia, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel primarily against the Assassins, an extreme Isma‘ilite-Shi‘ite sect specializing in political The Il-Khanate was a Mongol state that ruled murder, and the Abbasid Caliphate. Hülegü in Western Asia c.1256–1335. It was known left Mongolia in 1253. In 1256, he defeated to the Mongols as ulus Hülegü, the people the Assassins at Alamut, next to the Caspian or state of Hülegü (1218–1265), the dynasty’s Sea, adding to his retinue Nasir al-Din al- founder and grandson of Chinggis Khan Tusi, one of the greatest polymaths of the (Genghis Khan). Centered in Iran and Muslim world, who became his astrologer Azerbaijan but ruling also over Iraq, Turkme- and trusted advisor. In 1258, with the help nistan, and parts of Afghanistan, Anatolia, of various Mongol tributaries, including and the southern Caucasus (Georgia, many Muslims, he brutally conquered Bagh- Armenia), the Il-Khanate was a highly cos- dad, eliminating the Abbasid Caliphate that mopolitan empire that had close connections had nominally led the Muslim world for more with China and Western Europe. It also had a than 500 years (750–1258). Hülegü continued composite administration and legacy that into Syria, but withdrew most of his troops combined Mongol, Iranian, and Muslim after hearing of Möngke’s death (1259). The elements, and produced some outstanding defeat of the remnants of his troops by the cultural achievements.
    [Show full text]